What do you think the Good News of Jesus Christ is?

[Bunyip]

I have an book of biblical archaeology backing up the NT from which would take days for me to post exhaustively. What citations can you provide for your claim?

Well from the listt posted so far, many are from a century or two later - Josephus is seen to be an interpolation and apparently refers to several different individuals as Jesus. Paul never encojntered the living Jesus and Tacitus is again much later.

So please keep posting examples, so far there are a few shreds ajd scraps - but not much of a case.

 

[jah59]

Well from the listt posted so far, many are from a century or two later - Josephus is seen to be an interpolation and apparently refers to several different individuals as Jesus. Paul never encojntered the living Jesus and Tacitus is again much later.

So please keep posting examples, so far there are a few shreds ajd scraps - but not much of a case.

Some scholars think some of Josephus' writings about Jesus are an interpolation, but not all are considered such by any scholars that I know about. While you are right that Jesus never encountered Jesus before his death, burial and resurrection, he did encounter him after his resurrection, while on the road to Damascus.

You seem to think it is common for historians to have access to original manuscripts from that time period or earlier. I've already posted comparative information concerning such documents. Have you not read any of that or do you just not want to accept it? Compare and post something even nearly as close that has anywhere near the number of copies indicating accuracy to what was originally written! I can save you some time and tell you right now, you can't!

 

[Bunyip]

Some scholars think some of Josephus' writings about Jesus are an interpolation, but not all are considered such by any scholars that I know about.

Yes

While you are right that Jesus never encountered Jesus before his death, burial and resurrection, he did encounter him after his resurrection, while on the road to Damascus.

(I assume you mean Paul) Well sorry, but I don't believe that interactions with people post mortem are evidential.

You seem to think it is common for historians to have access to original manuscripts from that time period or earlier.

Nope, I do not.

I've already posted comparative information concerning such documents. Have you not read any of that or do you just not want to accept it? Compare and post something even nearly as close that has anywhere near the number of copies indicating accuracy to what was originally written! I can save you some time and tell you right now, you can't!

The number of copies? How is that relevant to establishing validity?

 

[Sonofason]

I did. I provided the passage from the Apocalypse of Peter.

That book is not a part of the Bible. It is very likely a forgery.

 

[Sonofason]

Christians think in a lot of ways that might surprise you, Sonofason.

No such thought is biblical.

 

[JayJayDee]

Yeah, JWs conveniently forget that fact.

Or it could be that the original mandate was to "fill the earth", not overfill it. If God gave us the ability to populate the planet then he can call a halt to procreation when that has been accomplished. Who might conveniently forget that the Bible does not teach that we exist before conception?

We come from the dust and return there...that is what God told Adam.

 

[Riverwolf]

That book is not a part of the Bible. It is very likely a forgery.

Show your work.

Last I looked, it was a strong contender for a while to be included in the canon, while the Apocalypse of John had a really hard time getting in.

Besides, far as I'm concerned, the Biblical canon is arbitrary, anyway. Whether a text is "in" or not doesn't speak to the validity of its relationship to Christian mythos. Largely based on the fact that there are multiple different canons; the Catholic Bible has more books in the Old Testament than the Protestant Bible, and the Ethiopian Bible contains the Book of Enoch.

 

[Nada]

I find no good news in Jesus Christ. Having been a Christian I once tried gaining the courage to commit suicide and religion and Christian behavior was partly to blame.

There is Good News in it.You just have not come to understand it yet.Just because one calls themselves a Christian does not mean they are one.What religion was it? Suicide is never the answer.That's the easy way out.

 

[Sonofason]

Show your work.

Last I looked, it was a strong contender for a while to be included in the canon, while the Apocalypse of John had a really hard time getting in.

Besides, far as I'm concerned, the Biblical canon is arbitrary, anyway. Whether a text is "in" or not doesn't speak to the validity of its relationship to Christian mythos. Largely based on the fact that there are multiple different canons; the Catholic Bible has more books in the Old Testament than the Protestant Bible, and the Ethiopian Bible contains the Book of Enoch.

Well, my personal study of hell is quite lengthy, and my understanding of the present day accepted canon of the Bible, is quite comprehensive. Quite simply, the verse that was provided from the "Apocalypse of Peter" is, in my opinion, completely contradictory to Jesus' message.

God does not condemn the innocent, if such a thing should truly exist.

 

[Katzpur]

Or it could be that the original mandate was to "fill the earth", not overfill it. If God gave us the ability to populate the planet then he can call a halt to procreation when that has been accomplished.

Just suddenly make everybody infertile, huh? Well, I'm not arguing that He couldn't do that. I'm just pointing out that the Bible doesn't say anything about Him ever intending to do so. And unless He did, you'd have overpopulation the likes of which we can't even imagine. The bottom line is that, as long as you're going to insist that the Bible contains the sum total of God's word, you've got a problem, because you can't add anything to it (like your assumptions that He had the overpopulation problem under control).

Who might conveniently forget that the Bible does not teach that we exist before conception?

I have no idea. While the Bible does not explicit teach that, it does suggest (in several verses) that our spirits existed before our bodies were conceived and that we lived in God's presence. Of course, to someone who doesn't insist that there could not conceivably be truths outside of what the Bible teaches, it's a total non-issue.

We come from the dust and return there...that is what God told Adam.

I keep forgetting that you guys are literalists. I'm assuming you're trying to say that both the spirit and the body are made from dust. Yeah, I don't buy into that, at least not with respect to the spirit.

 

[Riverwolf]

Well, my personal study of hell is quite lengthy, and my understanding of the present day accepted canon of the Bible, is quite comprehensive. Quite simply, the verse that was provided from the "Apocalypse of Peter" is, in my opinion, completely contradictory to Jesus' message.

God does not condemn the innocent, if such a thing should truly exist.

He doesn't say the innocent are condemned. He displays universal love and forgiveness that everyone will one day get out of Hell.

 

[Sonofason]

He doesn't say the innocent are condemned. He displays universal love and forgiveness that everyone will one day get out of Hell.

Sorry, I just reviewed the posts of our conversation and realized that it was not you, but Philotech who made the statement, "Jesus is all loving yet concludes that people innocent of evil behavior should be condemned to a lake of fire to burn forever in eternity"

It is that statement that I take issue with. For some reason, I had concluded that you had taken this statement from the "Apocalypse of Peter". I was arguing that the statement was contradictory to the teachings of Jesus. Jesus never said such a thing. My argument is not with you, it is with the statement made by Philotech.